99MPower Posted May 15, 2012 Share Posted May 15, 2012 Have we looked into allowing the E36 to weld in the RTA pocket reinforcements, swaybar reinforcements, and front subframe motor mount reinforcements? These are area's that provide absolutely zero performance gain, but are WELL KNOWN issues in the E36 community. These area's are all known to rip out and cause massive failures, totaled vehicles on track (if failed on track), etc. http://forums.bimmerforums.com/forum/showthread.php?t=1731431 I could add example after example of the RTAB pockets ripping out, subframe's ripping from chassis, swaybar tabs breaking off, and front subframe engine mounts ripping off. Discuss If anyone knows me on bimmerforums, I do a considerable amount of this reinforcement work on E36s in the southern wisconsin/northern Illinois area, and have actually helped design the AKG RTAB plate reinforcement kit. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
TurboShortBus Posted May 15, 2012 Share Posted May 15, 2012 E-mail Greg Greenbaum directly at [email protected] for best results. Was there a BMW-issued recall for this issue with the E36s, as there was for the E46s? Mark Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
D_Eclipse9916 Posted May 15, 2012 Share Posted May 15, 2012 Was there a BMW-issued recall for this issue with the E36s, as there was for the E46s? Mark Nope :/ I asked Greg Greenbaum about it and he said no last year so I have been watching my rear trailing arm pockets very closely. Maybe if we can get a bunch of evidence/people together to show that it in no way helps performance but is a necessity for these cars. Nationals is the last time I will be in TTC as the additional +3 or whatever for reinforcement will kick me into TTB and I just cant risk it anymore. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
99MPower Posted May 15, 2012 Author Share Posted May 15, 2012 E-mail Greg Greenbaum directly at [email protected] for best results. Was there a BMW-issued recall for this issue with the E36s, as there was for the E46s? Mark unfortunately no... I've personally welded up 5 different E36's that have ripped out and countless others that were preventative. One of those was on track and immediately caused a massive spin. Luckily we were at a track that he didnt hit anything, or hit anyone. It's a massive safety issue, and as stated all 3 reinforcements do not provide a performance gain Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
dew-e Posted May 15, 2012 Share Posted May 15, 2012 Unfortunately for e36 owners the internet and BMW related car forums played a very big role in making the e46 lawsuit gain enough steam to warrant a class action suit. By the time the issue was gaining traction in 2005 and 2006 for the E46 cars, all e36 vehicles were out of warranty. If it were not for bimmerforums, unitedbimmers, etc... that lawsuit probably never would have happened. The problem is a lot worse on the single ear diff M cars, such as the m-coupe. Randy Forbes is probably the best source for information for the E36 cars, specifically the ones that share the single ear diff hanger design with the e30 cars. There was talk about lawyers taking names of affected cars and trying to get enough claims to begin similar lawsuits for the other models, but they've never gone anywhere. There are BMW service/warranty notices about how to fix it. Lots of people would argue that the BMW fix is a band-aid that was designed to cover up the issue and get the car out of warranty claims quickly. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
99MPower Posted May 15, 2012 Author Share Posted May 15, 2012 Unfortunately for e36 owners the internet and BMW related car forums played a very big role in making the e46 lawsuit gain enough steam to warrant a class action suit. By the time the issue was gaining traction in 2005 and 2006 for the E46 cars, all e36 vehicles were out of warranty. If it were not for bimmerforums, unitedbimmers, etc... that lawsuit probably never would have happened. The problem is a lot worse on the single ear diff M cars, such as the m-coupe. Randy Forbes is probably the best source for information for the E36 cars, specifically the ones that share the single ear diff hanger design with the e30 cars. There was talk about lawyers taking names of affected cars and trying to get enough claims to begin similar lawsuits for the other models, but they've never gone anywhere. There are BMW service/warranty notices about how to fix it. Lots of people would argue that the BMW fix is a band-aid that was designed to cover up the issue and get the car out of warranty claims quickly. great... I dont want to sound like a dick, but that has no basis here. The e36 cars have a similiar issue to the E46, and not just in the subframe mounting location, but also in the RTA pocket, swaybar bracket, and front motor mount area. None of these reinforcements have a performance gain, and if the e46 reinforcement can be brought into TT without penalty, I dont see the issue with letting the E36 as well. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
99MPower Posted May 16, 2012 Author Share Posted May 16, 2012 Just emailed Greg on the 4 primary reinforcements kits, where they can be purchased, and what they avoid. The subframe plates from the E36 M3 are also identical in reason as the E46 subframe plates. These were installed from the factory on most, if not all E36 M3s, but the Non-M didnt get them. Should be a free allowance as per the E46 ruling, using the OEM subframe reinforcement plates. The Rear trailing arm bracket pocket area (picture shown) is a VERY VERY serious safety issue in ALL E36 chassis'. When these rip out, you have zero control over the car, and in more cases than not, complete loss of control. I have not seen a failure on track, but have repaired more than a couple on street cars, tracks cars (found between events). I know a couple racers were ripping them out when racing in BMWCCA and they created an allowance for welding them in. AKG and Bimmerworld have acknowledged this issue, and have created reinforcement plates. This does not increase the performance of the vehicle. The rear swaybar bracket reinforcement. Under high loads at the track, the rear "ears" on the E36 subframe that hold the swaybar bracket, have been known to rip as well. Bimmerworld, Turner, and AKG have all acknowledged this issue, and have created reinforcement plates. This does not increase the performance of the vehicle. Lastly, the front subframe motor mount area. The motor mounts have been known to rip out of the subframe. This is a problem on the E30, E36, and E46. Bimmerworld, Turner, and AKG have all acknowledged this issue, and have created reinforcement plates. This does not increase the performance of the vehicle. In all 4 cases of the reinforcements, you can still use the OEM subframe bushings, OEM rear trailing arm bushings, OEM swaybar, and OEM motor mounts with these reinforcements. You can not gain a "performance" advantage from any of them, and they all become a safety issue on tracked vehicles. With the allowance of the E46 subframe, and the Lotus Elise toe plates, I believe there is reasonable evidence to allow these reinforcements to be made with no points allowance. Thanks Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
TurboShortBus Posted May 16, 2012 Share Posted May 16, 2012 These are area's that provide absolutely zero performance gain, it in no way helps performance all 3 reinforcements do not provide a performance gain None of these reinforcements have a performance gain As a general statement, per the TT rules, note that "performance" is only 1/3 of the equation when determining a points assessment: Some parts that are produced by aftermarket manufacturers as generic replacement parts may not require a points assessment provided that: theyare the same size and shape, and have the same functional characteristics as the BTM part, and that they provide no significant improvement in performance, longevity, or reliability. Also, note that Greg will be the one to determine any exemptions for these parts, not the forum. Mark Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
dew-e Posted May 16, 2012 Share Posted May 16, 2012 Unfortunately for e36 owners the internet and BMW related car forums played a very big role in making the e46 lawsuit gain enough steam to warrant a class action suit. By the time the issue was gaining traction in 2005 and 2006 for the E46 cars, all e36 vehicles were out of warranty. If it were not for bimmerforums, unitedbimmers, etc... that lawsuit probably never would have happened. The problem is a lot worse on the single ear diff M cars, such as the m-coupe. Randy Forbes is probably the best source for information for the E36 cars, specifically the ones that share the single ear diff hanger design with the e30 cars. There was talk about lawyers taking names of affected cars and trying to get enough claims to begin similar lawsuits for the other models, but they've never gone anywhere. There are BMW service/warranty notices about how to fix it. Lots of people would argue that the BMW fix is a band-aid that was designed to cover up the issue and get the car out of warranty claims quickly. great... I dont want to sound like a dick, but that has no basis here. The e36 cars have a similiar issue to the E46, and not just in the subframe mounting location, but also in the RTA pocket, swaybar bracket, and front motor mount area. None of these reinforcements have a performance gain, and if the e46 reinforcement can be brought into TT without penalty, I dont see the issue with letting the E36 as well. My comments were responding to Mark's question if the E36 had the same type of service recall after a lawsuit. Where the failure happens on my car the entire diff carrier detaches and falls from the car if you let it get bad enough. Basically using the exhaust as a diff "crutch". As Mark said though, Greg is the one to decide, along with whomever else is involved in that process. I'd like to see it allowed as I don't run any of these plates on my car, but at some point, how do you avoid the slippery slope of everybody else starting to argue that parts for their make/model of car do the same thing. Glad I'm not the one taking the questions.. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
99MPower Posted May 16, 2012 Author Share Posted May 16, 2012 These are area's that provide absolutely zero performance gain, it in no way helps performance all 3 reinforcements do not provide a performance gain None of these reinforcements have a performance gain As a general statement, per the TT rules, note that "performance" is only 1/3 of the equation when determining a points assessment: Some parts that are produced by aftermarket manufacturers as generic replacement parts may not require a points assessment provided that: theyare the same size and shape, and have the same functional characteristics as the BTM part, and that they provide no significant improvement in performance, longevity, or reliability. Also, note that Greg will be the one to determine any exemptions for these parts, not the forum. Mark Thanks Mark, I have sent Greg a very long/detailed email as well last night. I didnt see the other part you qouted. If they are allowing the e46 fix (no performance gain, but is a longevity/reliabilty fix), then why can't they go further and allow other BMW chassis' with similar issues? Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
National Staff Greg G. Posted May 16, 2012 National Staff Share Posted May 16, 2012 Guys, This is just a big can of worms that EVERY driver of EVERY model car will then request waivers, rules, TB's, etc. so that they can make their cars more "safe" and "track worthy". I have (and many seasoned racers) have had nearly catastrophic failures in wheels, tires, wheel bearings, hubs, OEM/BTM and aftermarket suspension bushings, control arms, trailing arms, brake calipers, transmission/motor mounts, shocks, sway bar mounts, end links, various OEM/BTM brackets, etc, etc, etc. If we take a car built for the street, and add huge amounts of grip (and sometimes power), and then beat it up on a track for many hours, things WILL break. We are not going to go down the road of having to attempt to objectively evaluate (ie. engineering, physical testing, computer modeling, etc.) whether an upgraded part is for "safety" or performance. Street cars flex in multiple locations under load. Fixing that flex improves track performance, but can also prevent damaging BTM parts. Cages do not provide a fix in many locations. There are many car models that benefit in terms of seconds on track with just adding subframe bushings/connectors, etc. So, while the e-mail sent to me was done really well, I could write the same e-mail for the car that I drove to five national championships. There are plenty of aftermarket parts to strengthen various known failure points. And, I personally would have, "for safety", requested No-Points metallic bushing replacement, aftermarket control arms because the stamped crap bends and breaks, and aftermarket brake calipers. Most of you could come up with similar for your cars. This is a "Pick your frog, and live with the warts" issue. If you choose to drive a car that has been known to have parts break on the track, then either upgrade those parts and take the associated points, or keep a very close eye on them and take your chances. But, either way, it is YOU that are deciding to drive a car that you think may not "be safe". We obviously would suggest that you choose a different car, or make any and every upgrade necessary so that you feel the car is safe. So, if that means you need +3 points for "other chassis stiffening devices", then so be it. If it means you need +3 points for spherical/metallic bushings, then do it. These rules are made for thousands of models of cars, and are based on the performance potential of various modifications. So, if you decide to take +3 points for other chassis stiffening devices, the use those three points to the maximal benefit. If there is a case where there is an actual recall/technical bulletin or settled law suit by an automobile manufacturer, then we can look at those as we did with the E46's. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
99MPower Posted May 17, 2012 Author Share Posted May 17, 2012 fair enough. Thanks for the well thought out, and full explanation Greg Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Bnjmn Posted May 17, 2012 Share Posted May 17, 2012 I sure hope no one would protest a competitor with these mods and I would feel much better knowing that my competitors had these mods so that their engine, trailing arms and anti-sway bars don't decide to liberate themselves when I am in the vicinity. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
TurboShortBus Posted May 17, 2012 Share Posted May 17, 2012 I sure hope no one would protest a competitor with these mods and I would feel much better knowing that my competitors had these mods so that their engine, trailing arms and anti-sway bars don't decide to liberate themselves when I am in the vicinity. Then they should be taking the points for these modifications (as they have been declared by Greg above), which will avoid a protest situation. Mark Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
D_Eclipse9916 Posted May 18, 2012 Share Posted May 18, 2012 I sure hope no one would protest a competitor with these mods and I would feel much better knowing that my competitors had these mods so that their engine, trailing arms and anti-sway bars don't decide to liberate themselves when I am in the vicinity. Then they should be taking the points for these modifications (as they have been declared by Greg above), which will avoid a protest situation. Mark Absolutely, I take a lot of time, money and effort to make sure my car is legal. IF someone has mods that are on their car that are points and are not claiming it, I am that person that will protest. Of course, I personally would approach the person first about it before going to officials out of common courtesy to see if it was intentional or not and if they can fix it before the race/trial. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
NorcalTT Posted June 18, 2013 Share Posted June 18, 2013 Does anyone know if these points would be cumulative or all inclusive? In other words, on an e36 if you reinforce the rear swaybar attachments so they don't crack AND reinforce the front subframe so the motor mounts don't tear out, is that 3 or 6 points total? Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
kbrew8991 Posted June 18, 2013 Share Posted June 18, 2013 It would specify if it was a cumulative thing (+ 3 per...). Thus, it's like a lot of others once you get dinged for it, make it count. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
alwaysinboost Posted June 18, 2013 Share Posted June 18, 2013 I want to make sure I am understanding the rule correctly: Add or modify other chassis stiffening devices or fabricated parts (such as lower strut braces or lower arm braces (with greater than two attachment points), sub-frame connectors, sub-frame braces, sub-frame mounts/bushings, etc.) +3 I have already taken +3 for the subframe & RTA pocket reinforcements, but the part in BOLD about "other chassis stiffening devices" makes me think I can reinstall my OEM 4-point lower tie bar and not take a points hit. Am I correct here? Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
alwaysinboost Posted June 18, 2013 Share Posted June 18, 2013 I could have sworn I posted this a little bit ago, but it must not have went thru so here we go again... I want to be sure I understand the rules on this. I am taking +3 for RTA pocket reinforcements and also the swap bar reinforcements already, but the way I am reading the rule makes me think I can put my OEM 4-point tie bar back on the car and not take a points hit... Add or modify other chassis stiffening devices or fabricated parts (such as lower strut braces or lower arm braces (with greater than two attachment points), sub-frame connectors, sub-frame braces, sub-frame mounts/bushings, etc.) +3 The part in BOLD is what I am referring to, "other chassie stiffening devices". My car, a 99 e36 M3, came with a 4-point subframe/tie-bar when I bought it. From the research I did after I got the car I saw people saying it was more points so I removed it and forgot all about it. Now that I did the welding reinforcements, would I be able to reinstall and still be within those +3 points I've already taken? Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
NorcalTT Posted June 18, 2013 Share Posted June 18, 2013 Good to know. Thanks for the quick reply! Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
National Staff Greg G. Posted June 19, 2013 National Staff Share Posted June 19, 2013 I could have sworn I posted this a little bit ago, but it must not have went thru so here we go again... I want to be sure I understand the rules on this. I am taking +3 for RTA pocket reinforcements and also the swap bar reinforcements already, but the way I am reading the rule makes me think I can put my OEM 4-point tie bar back on the car and not take a points hit... Add or modify other chassis stiffening devices or fabricated parts (such as lower strut braces or lower arm braces (with greater than two attachment points), sub-frame connectors, sub-frame braces, sub-frame mounts/bushings, etc.) +3 The part in BOLD is what I am referring to, "other chassie stiffening devices". My car, a 99 e36 M3, came with a 4-point subframe/tie-bar when I bought it. From the research I did after I got the car I saw people saying it was more points so I removed it and forgot all about it. Now that I did the welding reinforcements, would I be able to reinstall and still be within those +3 points I've already taken? Unless one of these apply, then the three points covers all other chassis stiffening devices: From F: 2) Add front lower stress/arm brace (two attachment points maximum) +1 3) Add a third or fourth attachment point to a front or rear strut tower bar (or replace an existing/BTM three point bar) +1 (Additional attachment points must not be tied to any other type of mounting point with anything other than sheet metal) From H: 1) One or more bars that penetrate the front bulkhead/firewall +2 2) Any other attachment point to the chassis +2 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
NorcalTT Posted June 19, 2013 Share Posted June 19, 2013 I could have sworn I posted this a little bit ago, but it must not have went thru so here we go again... I want to be sure I understand the rules on this. I am taking +3 for RTA pocket reinforcements and also the swap bar reinforcements already, but the way I am reading the rule makes me think I can put my OEM 4-point tie bar back on the car and not take a points hit... Add or modify other chassis stiffening devices or fabricated parts (such as lower strut braces or lower arm braces (with greater than two attachment points), sub-frame connectors, sub-frame braces, sub-frame mounts/bushings, etc.) +3 The part in BOLD is what I am referring to, "other chassie stiffening devices". My car, a 99 e36 M3, came with a 4-point subframe/tie-bar when I bought it. From the research I did after I got the car I saw people saying it was more points so I removed it and forgot all about it. Now that I did the welding reinforcements, would I be able to reinstall and still be within those +3 points I've already taken? Unless one of these apply, then the three points covers all other chassis stiffening devices: From F: 2) Add front lower stress/arm brace (two attachment points maximum) +1 3) Add a third or fourth attachment point to a front or rear strut tower bar (or replace an existing/BTM three point bar) +1 (Additional attachment points must not be tied to any other type of mounting point with anything other than sheet metal) From H: 1) One or more bars that penetrate the front bulkhead/firewall +2 2) Any other attachment point to the chassis +2 When I read F, I take it to mean that you do have to take additional points (on top of the +3 for reinforcements) for adding the 4 point subframe/tie-bar/cross brace. Am I understanding this correctly or do the +3 cover the cross brace on the e36? Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
alwaysinboost Posted June 19, 2013 Share Posted June 19, 2013 clarified in BOLD, see below. H.2 has me a little confused though... Unless one of these apply, then the three points covers all other chassis stiffening devices:From F: 2) Add front lower stress/arm brace (two attachment points maximum) +1 4-point attachment, not 2-point so this doesn't apply 3) Add a third or fourth attachment point to a front or rear strut tower bar (or replace an existing/BTM three point bar) +1 (Additional attachment points must not be tied to any other type of mounting point with anything other than sheet metal) Not a strut tower bar so this doesn't apply From H: 1) One or more bars that penetrate the front bulkhead/firewall +2 does not penetrate anything 2) Any other attachment point to the chassis +2this is pretty vauge... it attaches the frame rails together in four spots, which I thought was covered in F Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
National Staff Greg G. Posted June 19, 2013 National Staff Share Posted June 19, 2013 When I read F, I take it to mean that you do have to take additional points (on top of the +3 for reinforcements) for adding the 4 point subframe/tie-bar/cross brace. Am I understanding this correctly or do the +3 cover the cross brace on the e36? I'm not sure what you are reading that gives you that impression. The +3 points that you are taking should also cover the "X" brace. None of the four other rules that I listed above apply. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
National Staff Greg G. Posted June 19, 2013 National Staff Share Posted June 19, 2013 clarified in BOLD, see below. H.2 has me a little confused though... Unless one of these apply, then the three points covers all other chassis stiffening devices:From F: 2) Add front lower stress/arm brace (two attachment points maximum) +1 4-point attachment, not 2-point so this doesn't apply 3) Add a third or fourth attachment point to a front or rear strut tower bar (or replace an existing/BTM three point bar) +1 (Additional attachment points must not be tied to any other type of mounting point with anything other than sheet metal) Not a strut tower bar so this doesn't apply From H: 1) One or more bars that penetrate the front bulkhead/firewall +2 does not penetrate anything 2) Any other attachment point to the chassis +2this is pretty vauge... it attaches the frame rails together in four spots, which I thought was covered in F Section H. is specific to roll cages/bars. The brace in question is not part of the cage. What I've seen with BMW's that can end up taking the +2 for H.2) and the +3 for F.4) is when the rear strut bar or other part of the cage extends downward and attaches to the subframe. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts
Join the conversation
You can post now and register later. If you have an account, sign in now to post with your account.